Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 08:56:38 10/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 03, 2001 at 10:51:13, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: >You did not like Bruce's example? This one does not involve scientific >knowledge: >Team A: One person , 1 cart, 100 boxes too heavy to lift by only one person. >Team B: Two persons, 1 cart, same 100 boxes. >Task = move them 100 yards. > >Team B will take <50% of the time that it will take for Team A. Lifting >once onto a cart is easier than pushing. This analogy fails because there are tasks that can be done by two persons and not by one alone. This is not the case for CPUs. The only difference I can think of is, that two CPUs can compute two result simultaneously! I think this is where you need to look for your holy gral ;) Find an algorithm where "causality" is important - sounds like something the quantum computer can take advantage of and not regular computers. Any other senario, and it won't matter if one operation is done before or after the other, in which case it's possible to task switch between the two threads. (of cause you wouldn't need 2 threads, might be easier to rewrite the algo. as a pure serial one). -S.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.